i am not sure what anne's background is or how much information she has
regarding donor milk, but i feel obliged to point out that milk banks are
nonprofit organizations, there are plenty of industries that "obtain" their
product for free and then sell it for the cost of processing (how about those
air machines at the gas station that give out - yes, air - for a quarter?),
and yes, it does cost the same, ounce per ounce, to process a 2000 ounce
donation as it does to process a 20 ounce donation, because each ounce of
milk is treated in the same way.

i am not certain why the milk banks are under attack in this discussion.
donor milk is an item dispensed by prescription. why are the insurance
companies not a problem in this situation? why are we not attacking them
about not covering the cost of the milk from a milk bank? you have to
remember that anyone who makes an informal donation of milk to another person
must still be reimbursed for the cost of shipping, which is not cheap. the
person who wishes to donate milk has other expenses, which might be something
which the recipient should reimburse her for.

of course people have varying levels of trust regarding using untreated donor
milk, especially from an anonymous donor. some people won't accept blood
transfusions. i would, of course, urge them to have a transfusion if it were
medically indicated, in the same way that i would support a patient using
untreated donor milk if that were the only option. but i discuss the
disadvantages as well as the advantages. with donor milk there ARE no
disadvantages, and if you think 2.25 an ounce is expensive, think about the
cost of the more expensive formulas, and the continuing cost (not of dollars)
of living with an unhappy, unhealthy baby. the cost of a baby not growing,
not gaining weight, not thriving, is something not clearly expressed by
money. what is the ultimate cost of tube feeding a baby who can't take any
other forms of nourishment?

you had a terrific idea and did not have enough information. are there laws
"forbidding" the transfer of untreated breastmilk? i doubt it. has anyone
heard of such a law? the only problem is that you set up a public forum for
an exchange which is not approved by the majority. this is analogous to the
situation with home birth before it became legalized in my state. it was not
illegal to give birth at home. it wasn't specfically illegal to be a lay
midwife (in some states it is/was). clients who desired a home birth had to
enter a trusting relationship with the midwife. if, for instance, there was a
bad outcome, it was assumed that one would not sue the midwife, as they had
no insurance.

there's a huge liability issue here, and i sure don't know the answer to the
problems, except to go on trust sometimes and empower patients to make
decisions based on accurate information. but you have to do the research. you
have to know all there is to know.

carol brussel IBCLC

ps i am preparing a handout about the cancer/breastmilk connection, please be
patient all that responded to me.

             ***********************************************
The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html